Summarize the following excerpt from the article:
In 2005, the story was revealed to be a hoax. In the national uproar, some newspapers called for Marco to take his own life.
Cercas was appropriately scandalized, calling Marco “this shameless con artist, this out-and-out liar, this utter scoundrel.” The author’s moral horror was matched only by his physical disgust for the “swarthy, balding, thickset, burly, mustachioed gnome.” (Garlands of epithets are a Cercas specialty; one more: “manipulative, obsequious, utterly unscrupulous parasite.”) He was repulsed by the glibness of Marco’s rationalizations and their sheer number: So what if he embellished a little here and there, went a typical Marco plea, it was for a noble cause — “to educate younger generations about the horrors.” Anyway, he wasn’t really lying — everything he reported did happen, just not to him. Aren’t there bigger sinners out there? What about Kissinger?
